Subcutaneous abatacept versus intravenous abatacept: a phase IIIb noninferiority study in patients with an inadequate response to methotrexate.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous (IV) abatacept. METHODS: In this phase IIIb double-blind, double-dummy, 6-month study, patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and inadequate responses to methotrexate were randomized to receive 125 mg SC abatacept on days 1 and 8 and weekly thereafter (plus an IV loading dose [∼10 mg/kg] on day 1) or IV abatacept (∼10 mg/kg) on days 1, 15, and 29 and every 4 weeks thereafter. The primary end point for determining the noninferiority of SC abatacept to IV abatacept was the proportion of patients in each group meeting the American College of Rheumatology 20% improvement criteria (achieving an ACR20 response) at month 6. Other efficacy end points, immunogenicity, and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 1,457 patients, 693 of 736 (94.2%) treated with SC abatacept and 676 of 721 (93.8%) treated with IV abatacept completed 6 months. At month 6, 76.0% (95% confidence interval 72.9, 79.2) of SC abatacept-treated patients versus 75.8% (95% confidence interval 72.6, 79.0) of IV abatacept-treated patients achieved an ACR20 response (estimated difference between groups 0.3% [95% confidence interval -4.2, 4.8]), confirming noninferiority of SC abatacept to IV abatacept. Onset and magnitude of ACR responses and disease activity and physical function improvements were comparable between the SC and IV abatacept-treated groups. The proportions of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs over 6 months were 67.0% and 4.2%, respectively, in the SC abatacept-treated group and 65.2% and 4.9%, respectively, in the IV abatacept-treated group, with comparable frequencies of serious infections, malignancies, and autoimmune events between groups. SC injection site reactions (mostly mild) occurred in 19 SC abatacept (IV placebo)-treated patients (2.6%) and 18 IV abatacept (SC placebo)-treated patients (2.5%). Abatacept-induced antibodies occurred in 1.1% of SC abatacept-treated patients and 2.3% of IV abatacept-treated patients. CONCLUSION: SC abatacept provides efficacy and safety comparable with that of IV abatacept, with low immunogenicity and high retention rates, consistent with the established IV abatacept profile. Rates of injection site reactions were low. SC abatacept will provide additional treatment options, such as an alternative route of administration, for patients with RA.

Impact of T-cell costimulation modulation in patients with undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis or very early rheumatoid arthritis: a clinical and imaging study of abatacept (the ADJUST trial).

BACKGROUND: Several agents provide treatment for established rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but a crucial therapeutic goal is to delay/prevent progression of undifferentiated arthritis (UA) or very early RA. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of T-cell costimulation modulation in patients with UA or very early RA. METHODS: In this double-blind, phase II, placebocontrolled, 2-year study, anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide (CCP)2-positive patients with UA (not fulfilling the ACR criteria for RA) and clinical synovitis of two or more joints were randomised to abatacept ( approximately 10 mg/kg) or placebo for 6 months; the study drug was then terminated. The primary end point was development of RA (by ACR criteria) at year 1. Patients were monitored by radiography, MRI, CCP2, rheumatoid factor and 28 joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28) over 2 years. RESULTS: At year 1, 12/26 (46%) abatacept-treated versus 16/24 (67%) placebo-treated patients developed RA (difference (95% CI) -20.5% (-47.4% to 7.8%)). Adjusted mean changes from baseline to year 1 in Genant-modified Sharp radiographic scores for abatacepttreated versus placebo-treated patients, respectively, were 0 versus 1.1 for total score, and 0 versus 0.9 for erosion score. Mean changes from baseline to year 1 in MRI erosion, osteitis and synovitis scores were 0, 0.2 and 0.2, respectively, versus 5.0, 6.7 and 2.3 in the abatacept versus placebo groups. Safety was comparable between groups; serious adverse events occurred in one patient (3.6%) in each group. CONCLUSION: Abatacept delayed progression of UA/very early RA in some patients. An impact on radiographic and MRI inhibition was seen, which was maintained for 6 months after treatment stopped. This suggests that it is possible to alter the progression of RA by modulating T-cell responses at a very early stage of disease. Trial registration number NCT00124449.

Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). Clinical management of its major complications.

Systemic sclerosis (scleroderma) is a disease of unknown cause whose pathogenesis involves interaction between the vasculature, the immune system, and connective tissue cells. Although specific therapy awaits a better understanding of its pathogenesis, proper management may enhance not only the duration, but the quality of life for most scleroderma patients. Presently, controlled prospective trials of therapeutic agents are lacking. Published reports of drug therapy for skin, kidney, cardiac, pulmonary, and gastrointestinal complications, as well as management of Raynaud's phenomenon, are critically reviewed in this article, and the authors' approach to management of difficult clinical problems is presented.

Duodenal and gastric ulcer healing rates: a review.

The H2-receptor antagonists ranitidine and cimetidine are more effective than placebo in healing duodenal and gastric ulcers. However, the results of many studies suggest that a significant number of patients respond to treatment with placebo. In general, gastric ulcers respond somewhat more slowly to H2-receptor antagonists than do duodenal ulcers. Comparison trials between ranitidine and cimetidine indicate that both agents are equally effective in healing duodenal ulcers. With gastric ulcers, the results are variable, and neither agent is as effective as in the treatment of duodenal ulcer.